Israel warns of Gaza ‘holocaust’Israeli leaders are warning of an imminent conflagration in Gaza after Palestinian militants aimed rockets at the southern city of Ashkelon. The deputy defence minister said the stepped-up rocket fire would trigger what he called a ‘bigger holocaust’ in the Hamas-controlled coastal strip.

This reported remark by deputy defence minister Matan Vilnai caused widespread shock and absolute horror. For an Israeli minister to use the word ‘holocaust’ to describe a limited war of Israeli self-defence, when for Jews of all people the ‘Holocaust’ means one thing: genocide — and this at a time when the calumny of the ‘Jews as Nazis’ is rampant around the world, putting Israel and the Jewish people at risk — was simply beyond belief.

It was indeed without any credibility — because Vilnai never said it. It was an appalling mistranslation by Reuters, the source of the BBC story. Vilnai said:

‘The more Qassam (rocket) fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, they (the Palestinians) will bring upon themselves a bigger “shoah” because we will use all our might to defend ourselves’.

Reuters translated the Hebrew word ‘shoah’ as ‘holocaust’. But ‘shoah’ merely means disaster. In Hebrew, the word ‘shoah’ is never used to mean ‘holocaust’ or ‘genocide’ because of the acute historical resonance. The word ‘Hashoah’ alone means ‘the Holocaust’ and ‘retzach am’ means ‘genocide’. The well-known Hebrew construction used by Vilnai used merely means ‘bringing disaster on themselves’.

As a subsequent Reuter’s story reported,

Vilnai’s spokesman said: ‘Mr. Vilnai was meaning “disaster”. He did not mean to make any allusion to the genocide.’ Israel’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Arye Mekel, added: ‘Deputy Defence Minister Matan Vilnai used the Hebrew phrase that included the term ’shoah’ in Hebrew in the sense of a disaster or a catastrophe, and not in the sense of a holocaust.’

But this grotesque mistranslation has given Hamas a propaganda gift which they lost no time exploiting:

Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri said of Vilnai’s comments: ‘We are facing new Nazis who want to kill and burn the Palestinian people.’

At a time when the rockets continue to rain down on the southern Negev and Israel is being forced to contemplate stepping up its incursions into Gaza because of the truly genocidal assault upon its citizens by Hamas, such a mistranslation is more than an unfortunate slip. In the present explosive atmosphere, it can lead directly to an enormous escalation of violence by the Palestinians.

It is not enough for Reuters to try to cover its backside in subsequent stories. It must issue an explicit retraction, and so must the BBC. Instantly."

"A rocket fired from Gaza Friday landed in a field in the south of the country not far from where hundreds of Israelis were hiking, including Knesset members touring the rocket-battered region."

"The reason I am always suspicious of these "Gaza" rockets is that they usually hit an empty field, and despite the frenetic press accounts of what might have happened, rarely cause any real damage.

Israel has a long history of false-flag attacks to justify wars of aggression, or worse, to trick other countries into fighting Israel's wars for her, and I see no reason not to suggest that these "Gaza" rockets are not more of the same.

WASHINGTON, Feb 29 (IPS) - The George W. Bush administration has long pushed the "laptop documents" -- 1,000 pages of technical documents supposedly from a stolen Iranian laptop -- as hard evidence of Iranian intentions to build a nuclear weapon. Now charges based on those documents pose the only remaining obstacles to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) declaring that Iran has resolved all unanswered questions about its nuclear programme.

But those documents have long been regarded with great suspicion by U.S. and foreign analysts. German officials have identified the source of the laptop documents in November 2004 as the Mujahideen e Khalq (MEK), which along with its political arm, the National Council of Resistance in Iran (NCRI), is listed by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organisation.

There are some indications, moreover, that the MEK obtained the documents not from an Iranian source but from Israel's Mossad.

In its latest report on Iran, circulated Feb. 22, the IAEA, under strong pressure from the Bush administration, included descriptions of plans for a facility to produce "green salt", technical specifications for high explosives testing and the schematic layout of a missile reentry vehicle that appears capable of holding a nuclear weapon. Iran has been asked to provide full explanations for these alleged activities.

Tehran has denounced the documents on which the charges are based as fabrications provided by the MEK, and has demanded copies of the documents to analyse, but the United States had refused to do so.

The Iranian assertion is supported by statements by German officials. A few days after then Secretary of State Colin Powell announced the laptop documents, Karsten Voight, the coordinator for German-American relations in the German Foreign Ministry, was reported by the Wall Street Journal Nov. 22, 2004 as saying that the information had been provided by "an Iranian dissident group".

A German official familiar with the issue confirmed to this writer that the NCRI had been the source of the laptop documents. "I can assure you that the documents came from the Iranian resistance organisation," the source said.

The Germans have been deeply involved in intelligence collection and analysis regarding the Iranian nuclear programme. According to a story by Washington Post reporter Dafna Linzer soon after the laptop documents were first mentioned publicly by Powell in late 2004, U.S. officials said they had been stolen from an Iranian whom German intelligence had been trying to recruit, and had been given to intelligence officials of an unnamed country in Turkey.

The German account of the origins of the laptop documents contradicts the insistence by unnamed U.S. intelligence officials who insisted to journalists William J. Broad and David Sanger in November 2005 that the laptop documents did not come from any Iranian resistance groups.

Despite the fact that it was listed as a terrorist organisation, the MEK was a favourite of neoconservatives in the Pentagon, who were proposing in 2003-2004 to use it as part of a policy to destabilise Iran. The United States is known to have used intelligence from the MEK on Iranian military questions for years. It was considered a credible source of intelligence on the Iranian nuclear programme after 2002, mainly because of its identification of the facility in Natanz as a nuclear site.

The German source said he did not know whether the documents were authentic or not. However, CIA analysts, and European and IAEA officials who were given access to the laptop documents in 2005 were very sceptical about their authenticity.

The Guardian's Julian Borger last February quoted an IAEA official as saying there is "doubt over the provenance of the computer".

A senior European diplomat who had examined the documents was quoted by the New York Times in November 2005 as saying, "I can fabricate that data. It looks beautiful, but is open to doubt."

Scott Ritter, the former U.S. military intelligence officer who was chief United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq from 1991 to 1998, noted in an interview that the CIA has the capability test the authenticity of laptop documents through forensic tests that would reveal when different versions of different documents were created.

The fact that the agency could not rule out the possibility of fabrication, according to Ritter, indicates that it had either chosen not to do such tests or that the tests had revealed fraud.

Despite its having been credited with the Natanz intelligence coup in 2002, the overall record of the MEK on the Iranian nuclear programme has been very poor. The CIA continued to submit intelligence from the Iranian group about alleged Iranian nuclear weapons-related work to the IAEA over the next five years, without identifying the source.

But that intelligence turned out to be unreliable. A senior IAEA official told the Los Angeles Times in February 2007 that, since 2002, "pretty much all the intelligence that has come to us has proved to be wrong."

Former State Department deputy intelligence director for the Near East and South Asia Wayne White doubts that the MEK has actually had the contacts within the Iranian bureaucracy and scientific community necessary to come up with intelligence such as Natanz and the laptop documents. "I find it very hard to believe that supporters of the MEK haven't been thoroughly rooted out of the Iranian bureaucracy," says White. "I think they are without key sources in the Iranian government."

In her February 2006 report on the laptop documents, the Post's Linzer said CIA analysts had originally speculated that a "third country, such as Israel, had fabricated the evidence". They eventually "discounted that theory", she wrote, without explaining why.

Since 2002, new information has emerged indicating that the MEK did not obtain the 2002 data on Natanz itself but received it from the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad. Yossi Melman and Meier Javadanfar, who co-authored a book on the Iranian nuclear programme last year, write that they were told by "very senior Israeli Intelligence officials" in late 2006 that Israeli intelligence had known about Natanz for a full year before the Iranian group's press conference. They explained that they had chosen not to reveal it to the public "because of safety concerns for the sources that provided the information".

Shahriar Ahy, an adviser to monarchist leader Reza Pahlavi, told journalist Connie Bruck that the detailed information on Natanz had not come from MEK but from "a friendly government, and it had come to more than one opposition group, not only the mujahideen."

Bruck wrote in the New Yorker on Mar, 16, 2006 that when he was asked if the "friendly government" was Israel, Ahy smiled and said, "The friendly government did not want to be the source of it, publicly. If the friendly government gives it to the U.S. publicly, then it would be received differently. Better to come from an opposition group."

Israel has maintained a relationship with the MEK since the late 1990s, according to Bruck, including assistance to the organisation in beaming broadcasts by the NCRI from Paris into Iran. An Israeli diplomat confirmed that Israel had found the MEK "useful", Bruck reported, but the official declined to elaborate.

*Gareth Porter is an historian and national security policy analyst. The paperback edition of his latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in 2006.(END/2008)"

They wanted to spend their old age together. An elderly couple, Fauziyah al-Darek, 66, and her husband, Mahmoud Qab, 70. They wanted to continue to enjoy their only daughter and their three young grandchildren in their modest home in Dir al-Ghusun. But now Mahmoud, a widower, sits on a white plastic chair in the center of the guest room in his house, a kaffiyeh wrapped around his bony face, alone. On the table stands a picture of his granddaughter and on the wall hangs a photograph of his wife, adorned with a black ribbon, pictures of colorful flowers surrounding the mourning photo.

Fauziyah died because of the insensitivity of soldiers who would not allow her to be rushed to the hospital in Tul Karm after she suffered a serious heart attack. She lay in the back seat of a taxi (the army had not allowed an ambulance to pick her up at home), breathing with difficulty and moaning in pain, her husband pleading with the soldiers, trying to persuade them, trying to explain to them that his wife was about to die - all to no avail. "Get out of here, we don't care if your wife dies," one of them said.

How would these soldiers feel if their mothers were treated like that? What lifelong memories would they carry with them? What goes on in the mind of a young soldier when an elderly Palestinian begs for his wife's life, the soldier sees her in serious condition in a taxi, and persists in his cruel behavior? These are questions that clearly did not preoccupy the soldiers who prevented Fauziyah from being transferred to the hospital. They had various excuses. They prevented her transfer, they caused her death, and to hell with all these superfluous questions.

A very old black and white photo: Fauziyah and Mahmoud when they were young exiles in Kuwait, where they spent many years of their lives. Mahmoud had this photo framed about three years ago, and hung it above their bed, the bed where Fauziyah died.

Part of the road to Dir al-Ghusun is breathtakingly beautiful. You cross the imprisoned and dying Tul Karm, the half-deserted city center no longer showing any signs of its good days. The refugee camps, Tul Karm and Nur al-Shams - light of the sun - look like ghost towns. Then you cross almond orchards at the height of their blossoming, and olive groves dappled with spring sunlight, until you reach Dir al-Ghusun, a town of about 15,000.

Mahmoud opens the door, a thin man who worked for years as a plumber in Israel. His speech is quiet and to the point. His only daughter is now with him, together with her children, taking care of her father during the difficult days of mourning. His wrinkled face expresses pain.

On Wednesday, February 13, Mahmoud took Fauziyah to the Dr. Thabet Thabet Hospital (named after the doctor who was assassinated by Israel) after she felt pressure in her chest. The hospital is in Tul Karm, about a 15-minute drive from Dir al-Ghusun. The next day, Fauziyah was released from the hospital, after doctors diagnosed a mild heart attack. The couple returned home by taxi with relative ease, although there were more roadblocks in the area than usual, due to warnings about a suicide bomber making his way into Israel.

On Friday, February 14, at about 11 A.M., they arrived home. A short time later, the Israel Defense Forces imposed a complete closure on all roads in the region, because of the warnings. Roadblocks were set up on every corner. During the following 12 hours, all the roads to Tul Karm were blocked and thousands of travelers were stuck on the roads in pouring rain, until midnight.

Fauziyah, leaning on her husband's shoulder, hurried to bed to rest from the trip and her short hospitalization. She asked for milk, and Mahmoud brought her a glass of hot milk. Afterward, she got up to go to the bathroom and returned to bed exhausted. Ten minutes later, she began to experience serious breathing difficulties. Mahmoud quickly called her brother-in-law, Dr. Abdel Fatah, but he didn't answer. Mahmoud dialed 101 and asked for a Red Crescent ambulance. About 10 minutes later, the Red Crescent informed him that the ambulance had been stopped at a checkpoint near the Shweike neighborhood, at the northern exit from Tul Karm, and the soldiers would not allow it to continue. The Red Crescent people suggested that Mahmoud try to go by himself with his wife to the roadblock that had been set up that same morning in the Al-Jerushiya neighborhood; maybe the ambulance would manage to get there. Mahmoud immediately phoned and called for a taxi from the village. Fauziyah managed to go down to the street by herself and get into the taxi.

They reached the roadblock. The taxi driver, Abdel Rahman Assad, would later relate that he bypassed a line of about 40 cars that were standing at the closed checkpoint and waiting. It was almost 2 P.M. Fauziyah was lying in the back seat, moaning. Mahmoud got out of the taxi and turned to a soldier. "Where are you going?" asked the soldier. "My wife will die in the car," replied Mahmoud, in Hebrew he had learned in the days when he worked as a plumber in Israel. "Let me take her to a hospital." The soldier: "It's forbidden. Go back home."

Mahmoud says he pleaded with the soldier at least five more times, asking him to at least look into the taxi and see how his wife was suffering. "Please, my wife is in the car. Let us go to a hospital." But the soldier wouldn't budge: "I don't care about anything. If she dies, she dies. That doesn't interest me." The pleas continued for about 15 minutes, as the woman's conditioned steadily deteriorated. "Take me to a hospital, save me," she shouted, gasping for breath. Finally, Mahmoud recounts, he tried to grab the soldier's face and kiss him in a gesture of pleading, but the soldier rudely pushed him away.

Helpless and terribly frustrated, Mahmoud returned to the taxi and told the driver to go back where they had come from. They drove to Dir al-Ghusun, to the town doctor, Dr. Azmi Zanibat, who lives at the southern entrance. Mahmoud entered the house and asked Dr. Zanibat to go outside to see his wife in the taxi. Equipped with a stethoscope and a device for measuring blood pressure, almost all his medical equipment, the doctor went out to the taxi. He examined the patient and discovered that her blood pressure was only 40/20. Her body was covered with beads of sweat, her face was yellow and she had increasing difficulty breathing. He injected her with Lasix (a diuretic) in order to release the liquids that had accumulated in her lungs. He knew that she was having a severe heart attack, but he was unable to help. Fauziyah was still conscious.

In his medical report, Dr. Zanibat wrote: "The patient arrived at my house at about 2:30 P.M., suffering from exhaustion, breathing difficulties and excessive perspiration. She was unable to stand on her feet. I examined her and I thought she was suffering from an accumulation of liquids in her lungs. I tried to give her first aid and thought that she had to get to the hospital quickly, to receive oxygen and urgent first aid treatment. She could have been treated had she arrived in time. Her husband told me that the soldiers had prevented him from reaching the hospital. I asked her husband to try to take her to the hospital in any possible way, because otherwise it would be impossible to save her. I estimate that if the patient had reached the hospital she would have received proper treatment and recovered. Fifteen minutes later I heard that she had died," wrote the doctor.

In bitter despair, Mahmoud returned home in the taxi, together with his dying wife. He had asked his brother-in-law, the doctor, to come to the house, and he was waiting for them at the entrance. Fauziyah's condition steadily deteriorated. They carried her to her bed. Those were the last moments of her life. The brother-in-law tried to resuscitate her and massage her chest, but in vain. Fauziyah was dying. A few minutes later she stopped breathing. That same evening they buried her in her village.

The driver of the Red Crescent ambulance, Hashem Khalil, told the field investigator of B'Tselem in the Tul Karm-Qalqilyah region, Abd al-Karim Saadi, about the sequence of events as he saw it: "I received a call about a sick woman in Dir al-Ghusun who was suffering from heart failure. At 1:45 P.M. I left the station. At the entrance to Shweike, I encountered a military roadblock. The soldiers ordered us to stop at a distance of 30-40 meters and didn't allow us to advance. I used the ambulance loudspeaker and told them that there was an emergency case of a patient with heart problems in Dir al-Ghusun. One of the soldiers signaled me to go back. I stayed in place and contacted the Red Crescent traffic officer in order to tell him that we were not being allowed to pass. The traffic officer turned to the International Red Cross and asked them to coordinate our crossing with the Israelis. We remained on the spot opposite the Israelis for about half an hour awaiting instructions. At 2:20 P.M. the traffic officer called and ordered me to return to the station. At about 2:35 P.M. the traffic officer told me that the Red Cross had informed him that the crossing of the ambulance had been coordinated.

"At 2:40 P.M. I arrived at the Shweike checkpoint again. The siren was working in order to signal to the soldiers to let us pass through the checkpoint without delay. The soldiers ignored it, and didn't let us pass. After a few minutes a military vehicle arrived and called to us on the loudspeaker: 'Get out of here.' I repeated the sentence in Hebrew: 'I have an emergency patient in Dir al-Ghusun with a heart problem.' The soldiers didn't care. I continued to wait until 3:07 P.M., and then the traffic officer ordered me to go back because the coordination with the Red Cross didn't help. We couldn't take the patient to the hospital. Later on I found out that the patient had died that same day."

SAN FRANCISCO, Feb 28 (IPS) - U.S. veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are planning to descend on Washington from Mar. 13-16 to testify about war crimes they committed or personally witnessed in those countries.

"The war in Iraq is not covered to its potential because of how dangerous it is for reporters to cover it," said Liam Madden, a former Marine and member of the group Iraq Veterans Against the War. "That's left a lot of misconceptions in the minds of the American public about what the true nature of military occupation looks like."

Iraq Veterans Against the War argues that well-publicised incidents of U.S. brutality like the Abu Ghraib prison scandal and the massacre of an entire family of Iraqis in the town of Haditha are not the isolated incidents perpetrated by "a few bad apples", as many politicians and military leaders have claimed. They are part of a pattern, the group says, of "an increasingly bloody occupation".

"The problem that we face in Iraq is that policymakers in leadership have set a precedent of lawlessness where we don't abide by the rule of law, we don't respect international treaties, so when that atmosphere exists it lends itself to criminal activity," argues former U.S. Army Sergeant Logan Laituri, who served a tour in Iraq from 2004 to 2005 before being discharged as a conscientious objector.

Laituri told IPS that precedent of lawlessness makes itself felt in the rules of engagement handed down by commanders to soldiers on the front lines. When he was stationed in Samarra, for example, he said one of his fellow soldiers shot an unarmed man while he walked down the street.

"The problem is that that soldier was not committing a crime as you might call it because the rules of engagement were very clear that no one was supposed to be walking down the street," he said. "But I have a problem with that. You can't tell a family to leave everything they know so you can bomb the shit out of their house or their city. So while he definitely has protection under the law, I don't think that legitimates that type of violence."

Iraq Veterans Against the War is calling the gathering "Winter Soldier," after a quote from the U.S. revolutionary Thomas Paine, who wrote in 1776: "These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman."

Organisers say video and photographic evidence will also be presented, and the testimony and panels will be broadcast live on Satellite TV and streaming video on ivaw.org.

Winter Soldier is modeled on a similar event held by Vietnam Veterans 37 years ago.

In 1971, over 100 members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with fellow citizens. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions.

"Initially even the My Lai massacre was denied," notes Gerald Nicosia, whose book "Home to War" provides the most exhaustive history of the Vietnam veterans' movement.

"The U.S. military has traditionally denied these accusations based on the fact that 'this is a crazy soldier' or 'this is a malcontent' -- that you can't trust this person. And that is the reason that Vietnam Veterans Against the War did this unified presentation in Detriot in 1971."

"They brought together their bona fides and wore their medals and showed it was more than one or two or three malcontents. It was medal-winning, honored soldiers -- veterans in a group verifying what each other said to try to convince people that these charges cannot be denied. That people are doing these things as a matter of policy."

Nicosia says the 1971 Winter Soldier was roundly ignored by the mainstream media, but that it made an indelible imprint on those who were there.

Among those in attendance was 27-year-old Navy Lieutenant John Kerry, who had served on a Swift Boat in Vietnam. Three months after the hearings, Nicosia notes, Kerry took his case to Congress and spoke before a jammed Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Television cameras lined the walls, and veterans packed the seats.

"Many very highly decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast Asia," Kerry told the committee, describing the events of the Winter Soldier gathering.

"It is impossible to describe to you exactly what did happen in Detroit -- the emotions in the room, and the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country, in a sense, made them do."

In one of the most famous antiwar speeches of the era, Kerry concluded: "Someone has to die so that President Nixon won't be -- and these are his words -- 'the first president to lose a war'. We are asking Americans to think about that, because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"

Nicosia says U.S. citizens and veterans find themselves in a similar situation today.

"The majority of the American people are very dissatisfied with the Iraq war now and would be happy to get out of it. But Americans are bred deep into their psyches to think of America as a good country and, I think, much harder than just the hurdle of getting troops out of Iraq is to get Americans to realise the terrible things we do in the name of the United States."

*Aaron Glantz has reported extensively from Iraq and on the treatment of U.S. soldiers when they return home. He is editor of the website www.warcomeshome.org and will be co-hosting Pacifica Radio's live broadcast of the Winter Soldier hearings from Mar. 14-16.(END/2008)"

Sorry to be so crude, but which is worse: my coarse language or what's in the picture?

"Independent.co.uk

by Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem

The bodies of two boys killed by Israeli air strikes, according to Palestinian officials, lie in a morgue in Gaza

Friday, 29 February 2008

Four boys playing football have been killed in Gaza by Israeli air strikes, according to Palestinian officials, as Israel responded to the death of a man from a barrage of rocket attacks with a bloody escalation of violence.

At least 16 Palestinians – including the four children – were killed yesterday as Israel responded to the deadly attacks the previous day.

While the Israeli military said it had been targeting militants and rocket-launching squads, the officials said the boys were playing football close to their homes in Jabalya, northern Gaza.

A relative, Ahmed Dardouna, 42, said the family had located the bodies of the boys – reportedly two brothers and their cousins – at a local hospital after they failed to return home. Rocket fire from militants into Israel continued during the day lightly injuring two Israelis and forcing the Israeli Interior Minister, Avi Dichter, to take cover during a visit to the border town of Sderot. His bodyguard was one of those injured, in a rocket attack launched before the minister arrived. Four rockets reached Ashkelon, 12 miles north of Gaza.

Palestinian officials said that while the majority killed were militants, 10 civilians were among the total of at least 27 killed over the past two days – seven of which were children.

They said that one Palestinian was killed and four wounded in a helicopter attack on a police roadblock 150 yards from the home of the de facto Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh."

Portrait of a hypnotized zionist tool. He can't even see how he is speaking out of both sides of his mouth. PeaceThroughJustice above has it bang on: HB says he is an ardent supporter of israel and he firmly stands behind israel's security"; then he is shocked that anyone would suggest that US foreign policy is controlled by zionists.

There is no end of evidence that this kind of rage is bubbling to the surface all over America. My sister-in-law tells me that the almost-censored If Americans Knew speech at the Greenwich Library last week was "a mob scene." I've blogged about the fact that at a Yivo event, neocon Iraq-war-planner Bill Kristol had a hunted look as he spoke of the craziness that had surrounded neocons since the war. Neocon chronicler Jacob Heilbrunn has seemed fearful in his public statements about his book, They Knew They Were Right: The Rise of the Neocons, stepping away from his own assertion that neocons formed cabals in the government.

It is as if he is spooked by the snakepit he stepped into. The fact that our Israel policy has hurt us across the Arab world is no longer a revelation to Americans. They know it, and seem to want to do something about it. Jimmy Carter and Walt and Mearsheimer and the Iraq debacle have been an IV-drip into the American bloodstream.

The rage out there is not antisemitism. It may be antiZionism, it may be isolationism. It is a groundswell that needs to be addressed honestly. When Congressman Berman went into fits of denial that there is an Israel lobby, after saying that he joined the Foreign Affairs Committee because he cared about Israel, this was not honest.

What should Jewish institutions do about it?

The answer is obvious, they should have forums. They should express the range of Jewish opinion re Israel (not the narrow range that Yivo gathered in its Martin Peretz-organized forum on Walt and Mearsheimer in November). They should encourage that range.

They should begin an open discussion within the Jewish community of what Zionism has done to Jewish identity and American foreign policy. They should grill the neocons and give a platform to post-Zionist Jews like Joel Kovel and David Zellnik, rather than just smearing them.

They should confront the extent to which the adamant refusal by the Jewish establishment to acknowledge Palestinian suffering even as it insists that Israel is a democracy has hurt Judaism and hurt U.S. foreign policy.

They should wake up.

Philip Weiss lives in New York and is an investigative journalist who has been a contributing writer to the New York Times Magazine, Jewish World Review, The New York Observer and other mainstream publications as well as being as being a contributing editor to Esquire and Harper's Magazine.Weiss is the author of the 2004 book "American Taboo: A Murder In The Peace Corps." He is now working on a book about Jewish issues. He writes a blog for the New York Observer, Mondoweiss."

NEVER FORGET!"GAZA, (PIC)-- Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilnai told the Israeli Army Radio on Friday: "The more Qassam fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, [the Palestinians] will bring upon themselves a bigger holocaust because we will use all our might to defend ourselves.", according to Haaretz.

Tuesday night’s hundredth (or it just fucking seems like it) Democratic Party debate was the gunfight at the OK Corral for Hillary Rodham-Clinton, time to take down that uppity new sheriff who was threatening the cattle barons and she rode into town with an icy glare, a lust for the kill regaled in full Machiavellian power bitch black. She sleazed, she slimed, she used innuendo, she bitched and she moaned and she tried to link Barack Obama to the dreaded Louis Farrakhan the fake devil who is the leader of the Nation of Islam who endorsed him which also allowed for the dealing from the bottom of the deck the balls nastiest of all weapons: the Anti-Semite card. Farrakhan, the dude with that nifty bowtie just like the one that Tucker Carlson likes to prance around in may have endorsed Obama but he is far from the only national figure to do so, Chris Dodd came out for the B Man yesterday as well and we sure as hell aren’t allowed to scrutinize the high rolling Big Apple Jews (the “New York money people” as Clinton supporter Wesley Clark used to refer to them) who funnel money into the Hillary machine despite their loathsome support of human rights abuses and war crimes against the Palestinians but that is another rant for another time, and besides it is just damned un-American to criticize such an important ally.

The real heavy artillery though was rolled out by some fuckwad little dipshit Clinton operatives over at the Drudge Report (now an outlet for Clinton slime) of Mr. Obama in Somali garb that “jist makes him look like al-Qaeda” and besides, he don’t swear on the bible, won’t wear one of them thar ‘murkan flag lapel pin thingies and his wife ain’t proud of her country so he must be a terrist…get used to that because you are going to be hearing a lot of it, especially if you happen to live in peckerwood nation. When all else fails, go negative and the Clintons are masters at such dark arts having practically fornicated in the gutter with some of the lowest sleazeballs in American politics, think James Carville and Dick Morris and now of course the grossly overpaid Karl Rove wannabe Mark Penn. She did all but give America’s shining new prince a running dropkick in the balls the several days and with the Lone Star state showdown less than a week away and the spin-meisters having somehow flim-flammed Americans into thinking that an overhyped loser of 11 straight primaries is starting the game with a tied score this next six days are going to be extremely ugly for Barack Hussein Obama.

The Clintons have in addition to using Drudge as a cut out to circulate the already infamous picture that has the moronic fuckheads in this blooming Idiocracy screaming ‘Manchurian candidate’ at what they have been sold to be one of those madrassa bred Islamofascists set to take over the United States by stealth proudly launched a kitchen sink campaign of scorched earth demagoguery and smears that will assuredly light up the sky and only strengthen the resurgent John McCain another traveler who successfully managed to turn a story about his business as usual graft mongering with lobbyists into an all out frontal attack at American Pravda aka the damned liberal New York Times. There is also the recently floated link to the radical Weather Underground, fear mongering about needing experience because people are going to kill us otherwise and the ultimate indignity a comparison to George W. Bushhimself.

The Clintons are going to have their restoration or they are going to hunker down like Adolf Hitler during those desperate final days in the bunker right before the Goebbels children were poisoned and Der Fuhrer decided to go on and perform fellatio on a luger right before loyalists would soak the bodies with gasoline and torch the whole fucking mess while the Russians were laying seige to Berlin. It seems that Der Führer just had this bug up his ass that led to him declaring war against the German people themselves for failing to see that thousand year Reich thing through because, Goddamnit he was entitled to be the ruler of the world.

Gotterdammerung or Bust! Bad analogy? Maybe, maybe not but you get the point.

Mrs. Clinton has become increasingly unhinged over the last few days as the true sting of the mass rejection of her by Americans becomes more apparent. Hillary Rodham-Clinton is like a foreign object, a toxin force fed down the throats of the so-called opposition and the body is reacting as it naturally would – it is in the process of vomiting it up. The sheer rage of Clinton is a wonder to behold and much is being written about it by the more astute while the apologists, aspiring lackeys and assorted other hillemmings eat Dunkin Donuts and lash out while the bunker itself if being overrun. I especially liked this one by p m carpenter very appropriately entitled Thorazine Time For Hillary and her manufactured outrage over some Obama mailings in Ohio that provided the excuse for this latest PMS bitch fit:

No candidate at this hopeless, pointless stage in what you might call his or her right mind would launch such a party-splitting, nerve-shattering attack. It was "wrong." It was "shameful." It was "destructive." It played right into the GOP's hands, and every Democrat should indeed be outraged.

But about every Democrat, Hillary is thinking not one minute. She is thinking about only one. She has lost all human perspective, engulfed as she is in a narcissistic, entitled rage. If Democrats won't have her, then the country -- which earlier this week she still mawkishly prayed would "be fine ... no matter what happens" -- won't have any Democrat in the White House come 2009. So she'd be primed for an earlier run in 2012, not 2016.

Hillary Clinton is now less a tragic figure right out of Karl Rove's playbook than straight out of Shakespeare. She's willing to sell the fate of an entire nation down the road, so that someday, sooner, she may be queen.

And if you reject the Shakespeare metaphor, perhaps Ann Rice? Please, somebody grab a wooden stake.

Now that's some fucking great commentary, absolutely brilliant and spot on and as for those mailings you know I could care less if the Obama campaign were circulating pamphlets stating that the Clintons were participating in Illuminati Satanic child sacrifices at the Bohemian Grove, this is all more of the ridiculous bullshit and pissing and moaning from a woman scorned who is still in denial that she has triangulated herself into a trap from which there is no escape. In the end it is all about the war and that cynical vote on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment to pander to the neocons and Zionazis was just a bridge too far. Whether before Denver or after bringing the party down so that she can get her ass kicked by McCain in the general election it always will be about Iraq, and the betrayal of every quisling Democrat who enabled the bitch while burying a dagger in the backs of Americans.

Frank Rich also did another piece on Clinton in the NYT on Sunday continuing his hitting streak with his latest entitled The Audacity Of Hopelessness:

When people one day look back at the remarkable implosion of the Hillary Clinton campaign, they may notice that it both began and ended in the long dark shadow of Iraq.

It’s not just that her candidacy’s central premise — the priceless value of “experience” — was fatally poisoned from the start by her still ill-explained vote to authorize the fiasco. Senator Clinton then compounded that 2002 misjudgment by pursuing a 2008 campaign strategy that uncannily mimicked the disastrous Bush Iraq war plan. After promising a cakewalk to the nomination — “It will be me,” Mrs. Clinton told Katie Couric in November — she was routed by an insurgency.

And -

Clinton fans don’t see their standard-bearer’s troubles this way. In their view, their highly substantive candidate was unfairly undone by a lightweight showboat who got a free ride from an often misogynist press and from naïve young people who lap up messianic language as if it were Jim Jones’s Kool-Aid. Or as Mrs. Clinton frames it, Senator Obama is all about empty words while she is all about action and hard work.

But it’s the Clinton strategists, not the Obama voters, who drank the Kool-Aid. The Obama campaign is not a vaporous cult; it’s a lean and mean political machine that gets the job done. The Clinton camp has been the slacker in this race, more words than action, and its candidate’s message, for all its purported high-mindedness, was and is self-immolating.

And –

The insults continued on Tuesday night when a surrogate preceding Mrs. Clinton onstage at an Ohio rally, Tom Buffenbarger of the machinists’ union, derided Obama supporters as “latte-drinking, Prius-driving, Birkenstock-wearing, trust-fund babies.” Even as he ranted, exit polls in Wisconsin were showing that Mr. Obama had in fact won that day among voters with the least education and the lowest incomes. Less than 24 hours later, Mr. Obama received the endorsement of the latte-drinking Teamsters.

What wonderful irony, the Clinton campaign is now ripping off the infamous Harry and Louise ads but to anyone who understands Hillary Rodham-Clinton and her fake liberalism this should be no surprise that the former Goldwater Girl would draw so heavily on the Republican playbook. But this seething and seemingly irrational hatred of Obama is personal for a very different reason than is widely acknowledged. Hillary is so pissy because she is getting her clock cleaned by a guy who actually worked under the legendary Saul Alinsky who she did a famous thesis on and then turned down an actual gig, she was already a serial triangulator way back then. What a hoot. This is a great excerpt that I ran across from from the conservative website called American Thinker (an oxymoron if I ever heard one) called Obama's Alinsky Jujitsu:

These personal qualities are not the sole reason he is where he is, and I suspect the wily Mrs. Clinton knows this full well. I suspect it must bother her that Obama also appears to have mastered the playbook used by her own political teacher, the legendary amoral guru of left wing activism, Saul Alinksy.

Hillary has met not only her match in Alinsky tactics, she has met the master of bloodless socialist revolution, in my opinion.

Obama's Alinsky Lessons

Barack Obama had just graduated from Columbia and was looking for a job. Some white leftists were looking for someone who could recruit in a black neighborhood in the south side of Chicago.

Obama answered a help-wanted ad for a position as a community organizer for the Developing Communities Project (DCP) of the Calumet Community Religious Conference (CCRC) in Chicago. Obama was 24 years old, unmarried, very accustomed to a vagabond existence, and according to his memoir, searching for a genuine African-American community.

Both the CCRC and the DCP were built on the Alinsky model of community agitation, wherein paid organizers learned how to "rub raw the sores of discontent," in Alinsky's words.

One of Obama's early mentors in the Alinsky method was Mike Kruglik, who had this to say to an Ryan Lizza of The New Republic, about Obama:

"He was a natural, the undisputed master of agitation, who could engage a room full of recruiting targets in a rapid-fire Socratic dialogue, nudging them to admit that they were not living up to their own standards. As with the panhandler, he could be aggressive and confrontational. With probing, sometimes personal questions, he would pinpoint the source of pain in their lives, tearing down their egos just enough before dangling a carrot of hope that they could make things better."

The agitator's job, according to Alinsky, is first to bring folks to the "realization" that they are indeed miserable, that their misery is the fault of unresponsive governments or greedy corporations, then help them to bond together to demand what they deserve, and to make such an almighty stink that the dastardly governments and corporations will see imminent "self-interest" in granting whatever it is that will cause the harassment to cease.

In these methods, euphemistically labeled "community organizing," Obama had a four-year education, which he often says was the best education he ever got anywhere.

Is it any wonder, then, that Obama's Alinsky Jujitsu is making mincemeat of the woman who merely interviewed Alinsky, wrote about him, and spent the next 30 years in corporate law and in the lap of taxpayer-funded luxury in government mansions?

While she has obviously been outflanked by the far more savvy Obama who is ready to checkmate the bitch in a move right out of Alinsky’s playbook, the irony of the whole thing is fucking delicious. While Obama is playing multi-level chess to her checkers games for the rubes it will be ultimately be her lack of any sort of a principled stand on any of the truly important matters of the Bush years when we as a nation were stripped of our civil liberties, spied upon, made subject to torture, were looted and saw illegal wars launched that have turned the United States into a global pariah.

Then there is that voice, I can’t possibly think of anything more grating than that voice, it is worse than Edith Bunker on helium. That nagging, mean spirited and accusatory tone is something that just makes the hair on the back of the necks of every married man in America stand up. Hillary Rodham-Clinton may be talking about perpetual warfare, the need for experience, pimping the security state, engaging in slime and destroy rhetoric or talking about the need for a healthcare reform system that keeps in place the very same for profit system that has sucked us dry like leeches on our backs but there is that voice. It is the same sort of hectoring and haranguing that brays at the fucked over American male to get his lazy ass out of the barcalounger and take out the trash. It is like nails on a chalkboard – believe me, I live through that personal hell on a daily basis and when she has lost the football watching, beer bellied, limp dick demographic she truly has lost America.

Two Israeli ministers are openly debating the best way to kill Palestinian people. It seems that the Israeli Minister for Terrorism Against Palestinians, Ehud Barak, favours an invasion of the Gaza Strip to kill as many Palestinian fighters that they can lay their hands on, while the Israeli Minister for the Interior, Meir Sheetrit, would prefer a massive targeted killing spree. Either way, it is likely that many innocent civilians will die as well as many Palestinian fighters.

Sheetrit says: "We must not let anyone involved in the shooting stay alive. I am opposed to hesitation and in favour of wiping out anyone who is in Hamas; from the military and political echelons, no matter who." Barak on the other hand simply says: "Israel will reach those responsible, hit them in operations, and Hamas will pay the price for its activities."

One has to wonder where the world’s indignation is as ministers of one nation coldly and deliberately plan to murder the leaders of another nation. One can imagine the outcry from the Western mainstream media if Hamas announced to the world that it had found the means by which it could launch silent and deadly accurate missiles at individuals and was about to embark on a campaign of targeted killings of Israeli political and military leaders. Yet when the Israelis do it, we hear absolutely nothing.

There is, of course, a bigger picture to be seen in all this. Israel’s war against Hamas is simply part of a much more complex strategy designed to provoke Hezbollah and Syria into a wider confrontation that ultimately will draw in Iran. Israel will then find some cause to attack Iran and then the US will enter the fray in order to protect Israel. The resultant will be; Israel will have a free hand to deal with the Gaza and the West Bank as it sees fit and Hezbollah without support from Syria or Iran will be beaten. Hamas, the elected government of the Palestinian people, will be annihilated.

"The Boston Globe's publisher said yesterday the newspaper is looking to cut 60 positions through voluntary buyouts, as part of a broader cost-cutting effort at the company.

Because it is a SHIT PAPER!!!

Buyout packages also will be offered at the Worcester Telegram & Gazette, where 20 positions will be eliminated.

Both the Globe and the Telegram & Gazette are owned by The New York Times Co., which this month said it would trim 100 jobs from The New York Times newsroom.

Imagine a world in which there is no Zionist-controlled press, readers, just blogs!!

Oh, what a wonderful world!!

Heading that way, too!!!!

Globe publisher Steve Ainsley said in a memo to employees, "This reduction in staff is a difficult but necessary step toward our ongoing goals of reducing costs and finding efficiencies that allow for the long-term health of our business."

The problem is the PRODUCT of BULLSHIT LIES, guys!

That's why your business is sick!!!

Look at me: I read and purchased your papers for DECADES, but NO MORE!!!!

This buyout will affect about 3 percent of the Globe's 2,200 employees. It is smaller in scale than the buyout completed last March, in which a total of 125 employees left the Globe and the Telegram & Gazette. This is the Globe's fourth buyout offer since 2001.

You guys must be getting a POWER FLUSH in that crapper, because the Globe is GOING DOWN FAST!!!!

Twenty-four Globe newsroom employees took last year's buyout. This time, the company said it is not looking to reduce the newsroom staff by a specific number. There are several vacant jobs in the newsroom, which will count toward the 60 positions.

Yeah, that's another way: don't replace people.

Businesses are great at doing that!

The buyout will be offered to employees with five or more years at the company. They will be given two weeks pay for every year of service, with a cap of one year's pay. Globe employees who received lifetime job guarantees in the early 1990s will be given three weeks pay for each year of service, capped at two years' pay.

Layoffs are possible, a Globe executive confirmed, if not enough people take the buyout.

And I will have not one bit of sympathy.

Not for those who PROMOTE LIES and PUSH an ELITE AGENDA!!!!

Dan Totten, president of the Boston Newspaper Guild, which represents 900 Globe employees including newsroom staff, said the guild has lost about 300 members since 2000 as a result of buyouts and other job cuts. "We're concerned about staffing levels, which are already horrendously low." The job reductions have been particularly severe in the company's business operations, he said.

Do us all a favor, MSM, and GO OUT of BUSINESS then!!!!

Employees of Boston.com, the website affiliated with the Globe, will be excluded from the buyout offer.

The site still sucks!

Where do you think I'm getting all this stuff?

Ainsley said the company would "continue to invest in this growing area of the business." Employees of GlobeDirect, a direct-mail unit, also will be excluded.

The latest round of Globe buyouts comes as the newspaper industry continues to struggle with shrinking revenues and pressure to make online news sites more profitable.

Ooooooooh, so EVEN THEIR WEBSITES are UNPROFITABLE!!!!

And here I am operating a blog of chewing gum and post-it notes!!!

Bye-bye, Globe -- whoooooooooosh!!!!!

Tribune Co. of Chicago this month said it would cut as many as 500 positions companywide, or 2 percent of its staff, including 100 to 150 at the Los Angeles Times. Forty to 50 of those jobs will come from the Times newsroom."

Which means the ALREADY ABYSMAL coverage is about to get WORSE!!!

Do yourself a favor, readers, and abstain from the MSM press.

Or else you will end up like me -- pounding away on a keyboard as angry as hell!!!!!

FORT LEAVENWORTH, Kan. - The Army yesterday rolled out the first revision of its operations manual since the Sept. 11 terror attacks, putting stability operations - nation-building - on par with combat.

This from the guys whom were saying the military shouldn't be used this way, blah, blah, blah!

How's that bowl of shit taste, Americans, because you are going to be OCCUPYING the GLOBE and BUILDING UP OTHERS while America comes apart at the seams!!!

Army officials said the revision reflects a focus on fighting terrorism.

Yeah, the catch-all fraud of an excuse for all this -- a big. fat stinking lie!!!!

"The field manual is our Army's blueprint for an uncertain future," said Lieutenant General William Caldwell IV, commander of Fort Leavenworth, where the document was produced. "It does provide the blueprint for how we, as an Army, will operate over the next 10 to 15 years."

The new manual reflects Army experiences over the past six years of fighting the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and insurgents in Iraq, as well as with relief efforts after hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

Yeah, it is the U.S. PLAN for COMPLETE MILITARIZATION of the WORLD!!!!

Never mind that every example sited above was a CATASTROPHIC FAILURE!!!!

Caldwell said the United States will focus on building its influence in nations plagued by conflicts so that it can make them stable and secure.

How about SECURING AMERICA for a change?

We are in real trouble!

"If we are going to be a successful instrument of national will, we need to be as competent in executing stability operations as we have traditionally been in combat-military operations," Caldwell said.

In Iraq in the past few years, the United States has trained Iraqi security forces and is helping government ministries develop. A surge of 30,000 troops in January 2007 sought to root out insurgents and allow the Iraqi government to function.

Future operations, military officials say, will depend on joint efforts by all military branches and other US government agencies to assist foreign nations. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has repeatedly stressed that the military cannot accomplish all national security goals alone.

General William Wallace, commander of the Army's Training and Doctrine Command, calls the manual "evolutionary," incorporating new military ideas while retaining core Army values.

Translation: The U.S. is going to MILITARIZE the PLANET!!!

He said the current operations require initiatives that may not involve combat.

"It also requires leaders at every level to think and act flexibly, constantly adapting to the situation," he writes in an article appearing in this week's Military Review.

Work on the manual began in 2004, when Wallace was Fort Leavenworth's commander. He picked writers with operations or leadership experience and sought out officers who had graduated from the Army's elite School for Advanced Military Studies.

Lieutenant Colonel Steven Leonard, one of the team members at Fort Leavenworth, said some of the authors came "directly out of theater." Leonard was a logistician who worked with the 101st Airborne Division.

The Army also used conferences and reviews to shape the manual, involving senior Army leaders, civilian officials, members of Congress, and the news media.

Caldwell said he and Wallace also have been discussing the operations manual with Army "graybeards." They recognize that the United States has few military peers that would challenge it in conventional combat, the signature threat of the Cold War era.

Have these guys taken a look around lately?

Rag-tag bands of insurgents have us tied up in knots!!

You know, the OVER-CONFIDENT ARROGANCE of generals can LOSE WARS, folks!

What's it matter, anyway?

We got nukes in the quiver, and the American president will use them before being defeated.

"The environment has changed, and we need to alter our view as to how we organize, train, and prepare ourselves to operate in the 21st century," Caldwell said.

Ike Skelton, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, gave the manual good marks.

"I'm encouraged that the Army's new manual recognizes the importance of stability operations to address today's security challenges," said Skelton, a Missouri Democrat. "It represents a significant step forward, and our soldiers who have been fighting these two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will see their hard-learned lessons reflected in the text.

Oh, the DemocraP is all happy, too, so you can kiss this country good-bye, readers.

An agenda of NEVER-ENDING WARS for the American people -- for as long as they last!

Richard Weitz, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, wasn't sure what long-term effect the manual will have.

"The limited durability of the Army's past efforts to stress nation-building and counterinsurgency, while deemphasizing the importance of winning conventional wars, does not bode well," he wrote in a critique for World Politics Review.

Weitz cites the Army's experience after Vietnam. After an emphasis on fighting insurgents, he said, the Army lost interest and under President Reagan purchased weapons aimed at defeating the Soviet Union in a conventional fight. He said focusing on high-tech systems instead of civil affairs failed to achieve as much success as hoped in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"The willingness of the rest of the US defense establishment to undertake a comprehensive restructuring program aimed at undertaking noncombat operations better is doubtful," Weitz said."

So seven years later, Bush's "no nation-building" policy is now a BUSH DOCTRINE of NATION-BUILDING and OCCUPATIONS!!!!

".... Bush reserved his harshest comments for Mr. Obama’s recent statement that... made reviving American diplomacy a centerpiece of his foreign policy agenda, saying he believes it is “important for the United States not just to talk to its friends but also to talk to its enemies.”

.... Bush... at the news conference, let loose with a spirited monologue when asked what would be lost by doing so.

Mr. Bush, in reference to Mr. Castro, his voice growing louder as he paced about behind the lectern:

“What’s lost by embracing a tyrant who puts his people in prison because of their political beliefs? What’s lost is it will send the wrong message. It will send a discouraging message to those who wonder whether America will continue to work for the freedom of prisoners. I’m not suggesting there’s never a time to talk, but I’m suggesting now is not the time — not to talk with Raúl Castro. He’s nothing more than an extension of what his brother did, which was to ruin an island, and imprison people because of their beliefs.”

.... It was an unusually animated performance...."

Gee, if the New York Times noticed all the ticks and skittishness it must have been awful to be in there!

WASHINGTON - President Bush yesterday urged Congress to pass legislation that would give telecommunications companies immunity from class-action lawsuits for cooperating with US intelligence services in monitoring terrorist communications.

"Allowing these lawsuits to proceed would be unfair," Bush said at a White House news conference. "If any of these companies helped us, they did so after being told by our country their assistance was legal."

Noting that the litigation process could lead to the disclosure of surveillance techniques and make other countries less likely to cooperate with US intelligence services, Bush said: "You cannot expect phone companies to participate if they feel like they're going to be sued. It's patently unfair."

Without impugning the motives of those seeking to sue, Bush said he suspected "they see a gravy train," and urged House leaders to act so calls to the United States from overseas can be monitored.

Sort of like what the Iraq war is to you and your war-profiteering buddies, right, shitter?

"There are enough votes in the House to pass this bill," Bush said. "House leaders need to put the bill on the floor and give professionals the tools they need." Noting that phone companies are less likely to cooperate without protections, Bush said: "They're facing billions of dollars of lawsuits. They have a responsibility to their shareholders."

On Iraq, Bush called on Congress to fund US troops and chided critics for not acknowledging progress there. "When things were going badly, they called for withdrawal," he said, noting that since the surge in US troops, casualties are down and political leadership has begun.

So when things are going badly, it is more troops.

When they are going well, it is NO WITHDRAWAL.

We are NEVER LEAVING Iraq, Americans, so get ready to send your kids there next year!

On Russia, Bush defended his relationship with outgoing President Vladimir V. Putin, saying that the United States needs an open dialogue with Russia, even on occasions - such as the recent move toward independence in Kosovo - when they disagree.

"We've had some serious head-butts," he said. Acknowledging that he knows little about Putin's hand-picked successor, Bush said whoever is the next US president will need "a working relationship with Russia."

Asked about Senator Barack Obama's statement that he would be willing to talk to leaders with whom the United States disagrees, Bush said that "embracing tyrants" like Cuba's Raúl Castro "sends the wrong message" and "a discouraging message" to human rights activists struggling against totalitarian regimes."

Actually, it helps dissident movements if we remain as far away from them as possible now, lest they be seen as a U.S. TOOL!!!!

So there goes the crazy fuck LYING AGAIN!!!!!

And how come the LA Times didn't refer to how uncomfortable Bush was up there?

Why does the MSM shield this guy from scrutiny, readers?

Oh, now comes the CIA agent at the CIA newspaper to clean things up for Bush.

WASHINGTON - The bulletin reached President Bush toward the end of his news conference yesterday.

Peter Maer of CBS News Radio asked what seemed to be a straightforward question. "What's your advice to the average American who is hurting now, facing the prospect of $4-a-gallon gasoline"

"Wait, what did you just say?" the shocked president interrupted. "You're predicting $4-a-gallon gasoline?"

"A number of analysts are predicting $4-a-gallon gasoline," Maer explained.

You could've knocked Bush over with a feather.

Translation: He got ANGRY at the question!!

"Oh, yeah?" he said. "That's interesting. I hadn't heard that."

Uh-oh. The president, once known for his common-guy skills, sounded eerily like his father, who in 1992 seemed amazed to discover that supermarkets had bar-code scanners. On Wednesday, the $4-a-gallon forecasts had been on the front page of The New York Times and on NBC's "Today Show" and CBS's "Early Show."

Like that elite frat-boy of privilege ever was a common guy.

Just keep shoveling, Milbank!

And he doesn't read the papers.

How embarrassing!

I have something in common with Bush!

The president, however, had difficulty grasping the possibility, even after Maer told him. "You said the price of gasoline may be up to $4 a gallon, or some expert told you that," Bush repeated. "That creates a lot of uncertainty."

Why should he?

WE ARE PAYING HIS BILLS!!!!!!

Bush, too, faces a lot of uncertainty, and not of the petroleum-derived variety. In these waning months of the Bush presidency, Congress is increasingly ignoring his ultimatums. Reporters have left him for the campaign trail. And Bush at times seems to be lacking his killer instinct

Shovel, shovel, shovel!!!!!

At yesterday's session, NBC's David Gregory invited him to criticize Democratic presidential candidates for not knowing much about the expected new Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev.

"I don't know much about Medvedev, either," Bush replied.

Did Bush make Gregory do a jig with Rove, too?

Olivier Knox of Agence France-Presse asked Bush why he was going to the Olympics in China despite the country's human rights record.

"I'm a sports fan," the president reasoned.

Oh, the HUMAN RIGHTS don't matter when it comes to SPORTS, huh, ASSHOLE!?!!!!!!

What a FUCKING SHIT-FUCK SHITTER he is!!

GO AWAY, bush!!!

Just GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE FOREVER, will ya?

Fact is, people should be BOYCOTTING HIM!!!!!

And when Michael Abramowitz of The Washington Post asked Bush about his reluctance to talk to hostile foreign leaders, Bush delivered a tirade about the Castro brothers, then disclosed his intention to hug Abramowitz.

Readers, the guy is MENATALLY UNBALANCED and ALL the REPORTERS must KNOW IT!!!

Then WHY WON'T THEY TELL US, readers, and WHAT MORE are they HIDING about Bush (drinking)??

But is the country listening? The White House had limited attendance at the news conference to one reporter per news outlet, but this proved unnecessary; there were two rows of empty seats in the back.

The president got quickly to his familiar lines about the Democrats' weaknesses on terrorism: "We cannot protect our country from terrorist attack." But when Fox News's Mike Emanuel tried to provoke Bush by asking whether Democrats "are playing a high-stakes game" with the nation's security, Bush pulled back. "No, I don't think so," he said. "I don't think they're that cynical or devious."

But HE IS!!!

Anyone who is involved in the INSIDE JOB of 9/11 and the cover-up is DEVIOUS!!!!

Neither did he seem concerned by Gregory's accusation that he "badly misjudged" Russia's president, Vladimir V. Putin ("We've had some head-butts, diplomatic head-butts"), or the suggestion by Ken Herman of Cox News that he would take foreign money for his presidential library ("Yes, probably take some foreign money"). Even the lack of a replacement for his top homeland security adviser, who resigned more than three months ago, caused him no worry.

"We got a fine man named Joel Bagnal working that office right now," Bush said."

Well, if he's not that into it, we had better not get "attacked" any time soon.

Eleven years after the publication of her best-selling Holocaust memoir - a heartwarming tale of a small Jewish girl trekking across Europe and living with wolves - the Massachusetts author yesterday admitted the whole story was a hoax.

In a statement issued by her Belgian lawyer, Misha Defonseca of Dudley, whose book, "Misha: A Memoire of the Holocaust Years," has been translated into 18 languages and is the basis for a new French movie, "Survivre avec les Loups" ("Surviving With the Wolves"), confessed that she is not Jewish and that she spent the war safely in Brussels.

The 1997 book was the center of a multimillion-dollar legal battle pitting Defonseca and her coauthor, Vera Lee of Newton, against publisher Jane Daniel of Gloucester. The book was a bestseller in Europe and Canada, and attracted attention from Walt Disney Co. and Oprah Winfrey, but it sold few copies in the United States, largely because the marketing stopped after the authors sued.

So Oprah was going to hawk ANOTHER BOOK full of Zionist lies, 'eh?

Daniel's imprint, Mt. Ivy Press, was a one-woman operation when she met Defonseca in the mid-1990s, heard her story, and suggested that she write a book. In 2001, a Middlesex Superior Court jury issued a $7.5 million breach-of-contract judgment against Daniel after Defonseca and Lee alleged that she had failed to publicize the book as promised and had hidden profits. The judge in the case tripled the damages to $22.5 million, and an appeals court upheld the verdict in 2005.

Yesterday's confession follows a week of intense publicity in French and Belgian media...

But not in the Zionist-controlled AMERIKAN MEDIA, huh?

prompted by disclosure of documents unearthed by Waltham-based genealogical researcher Sharon Sergeant showing that Monique De Wael (Defonseca's real maiden name) was baptized in a Brussels Catholic church in September 1937 and that she was enrolled in a Brussels primary school in 1943-44. The researcher also discovered that Defonseca's parents, Robert and Josephine De Wael, were members of the Belgian resistance and were arrested and executed by the Nazis.

In her statement, approximately translated from the French, Defonseca said: "Yes, my name is Monique De Wael, but I have wanted to forget it since I was 4 years old. My parents were arrested and I was taken in by my grandfather, Ernest De Wael, and my uncle, Maurice De Wael. I was called 'daughter of a traitor' because my father was suspected of having spoken under torture in the prison of Saint-Gilles. Ever since I can remember, I felt Jewish. . . . There are times when I find it difficult to differentiate between reality and my inner world. The story in the book is mine. It is not the actual reality - it was my reality, my way of surviving. At first, I did not want to publish it, but then I was convinced by Jane Daniel. I ask forgiveness from all those who feel betrayed."

Translation: I'm an INSANE PERSON telling UNHOLY LIES!!!!!!!!!!

So I can MAKE a BUCK (well, that certainly is Jewish)!!!

In the book, 6-year-old Misha is rescued at school in 1941 when her parents are arrested and deported. She is spirited away to the De Wael family and given a new name, Monique. Unhappy with her host family, she runs away in hopes of finding her parents. Over the next four years she wanders alone across Germany, Poland, Ukraine, Romania, Yugoslavia, across the Adriatic Sea by boat to Italy, then through Italy across the Alps to France and back to Belgium. Along the way, she is sheltered by packs of wolves, kills a German soldier, witnesses an eastbound freight train full of Jews, wanders into the Warsaw Ghetto, and escapes. A 2001 story in The Boston Globe raised questions about the book's veracity, but Defonseca insisted that it was all true.

And what, the Zionist-controlled Globe just dropped it, huh?

Took a genealogical researcher to unearth the truth SEVEN YEARS LATER!!!

Actually, I'm surprised the article was even printed.

Of course, it is on page B6 under the fold-- even though it's not on the web!

"I am flabbergasted," Daniel said yesterday. "It's like something from heaven. I feel like the weight of the world has been lifted from my shoulders." She said she hopes to challenge the Middlesex judgment on grounds that the author's original contract had warranted the truth of the story, and that therefore the publisher had been defrauded before the book was published.

Reached yesterday, Defonseca's husband, Maurice, said his wife would not come to the phone, and he referred all questions to the Brussels lawyer. Vera Lee's lawyer did not respond to a request for comment.

A spokeswoman for Vera Belmont, the French director of "Survivre avec les Loups," said in an e-mail: "Vera is not making any comment. Her movie is a fiction from the book. No matter if it's true or not - she believes it is, anyway - she just thinks it's a beautiful story."

So, the EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS of the alleged holocaust are LIARS, too, huh?

But the Zionist-controlled MSM press pushes the Zionist bullshit anyway!

About Me

All material published for educational purposes under Fair Use Doctrine.
Warning: Some commentaries may include profanity. I offer my apologies in advance for those who may be offended by the harsh language in response to outrageous lies.